Abstract
A long debate exists on how the FBI compares to other training approaches. Scholars and security professions have frequently criticized the FBI motivational training and have termed it as unfit for the chaotic street environment. It is viewed as a softer approach to training law enforcement and intelligence analyst agents. I am of the opinion that the FBI Academy training approach has many strengths and might be an essential tool in protecting the American people from terrorist attack d other security threats. This paper will attempt to show the comparison between the FBI Academy Training and the quasi-military training.
Introduction
The FBI was established in 1908 by the department of justice as US investigative agency. Upon its conception, it was given the title of Bureau of the investigation. The Bureau assumed the present name, Federal Bureau of Investigation through the congress in 1935. Federal Bureau of Investigation has its mission to protect and defend Americans against terrorist attacks and other intelligence threats by local or foreign elements. Additionally, the agency has the mandate to uphold and enforce the criminal laws of the US.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The agency is tasked to offer leadership and criminal justice services to all Americans regardless of their status, position, culture or background. Therefore, the federal bureau of investigation is one of the most complicated security establishments in America and the world. The agency engages in extensive training for all its personnel in the mission to protecting the Americans and solving the federal crime. The recruitment and eventual training are intense and rigorous. This essay serves to compare and contrast the training methodologies utilized by the FBI against those used in typical police academies.
Recruitment
Before commencing their service in the FBI, new agents have to undergo critical step to prepare them in protecting the American’s. The new officers need to show commitment, skills and a strong will to serve in the agency. This new agent will be assessed on their capabilities to critical thinking, making decisions swiftly and ability to follow orders. These essential characteristics will help them in investigating and detecting crimes and security threats. The suitable agents will also need to show commitment to following the US Constitution and other laws as expected by the bureau (Stubbins, 2015).
To be liable for joining FBI career one must be a US citizen by birth or naturalization. The applicant must be at least 23 years of age. Candidates who are older than 37 years cannot recruit as a federal agent. To be appointed as an FBI agent, one must possess at least three years of professional work experience. The candidates need to have a four-year degree from a recognized institution of higher learning. Additionally, the trainees have to undergo an extensive background investigation, knowledge and physical fitness tests (Justice.gov, 2014).
Recruitment to the FBI is a competitive process and candidates must stand out to be considered a worthy candidate. FBI training takes place at their academy at Quantico, Virginia. The training takes 20 weeks of intensive training- both theoretical and practical. Trainees spend all their time in the training campus and are educated on various aspects of the security and intelligence service. Most of the class work entails studying on academic and investigative subjects. The other training that is done involves physical fitness, defensive tactics, use of weapons, armor and firearms and other practical exercises. In the academy, the recruits undergo stress based military based orientations (Stubbins, 2015).
Training programs
According to Cruickshank (2013), the modern society has placed special demands on the intelligence and security agencies. The public perception among the people on security and intelligence issues is shifting. FBI is forced to settle for newer approaches in training their personnel and keeping them motivated to deliver on public demands and interests. Nowadays the FBI is focused on having training that enhances leadership skills among its trainees (Cruickshank, 2013).
The primary field-training course is one of the programs used in FBI training. This program is employed for both new agents and intelligence analysts. It is important in preparing the trainees for collaborative tasks. In it, the environment is created to reflect on the actual scenario they will be facing during field assignments. There is an extensive curriculum for this training, and intelligence experts facilitate it. The training program prepares the candidates in utilizing, collecting and sharing intelligence information.
The agents are also trained on Tactical and emergency vehicle operations. In this training exercise, the agents are placed in a scenario where they have to use intelligence to respond and protect themselves when they are being trailed and cornered by an attacker.
Other FBI training ensures the trainees are instructed on how to drive safely, and efficiently. The training will also involve teaching the agents on how to track and catch criminals. In this practice, they are not supposed to be harmed; they should protect themselves using the available means. Handling dangerous situations might involve driving on bad terrain and even ramming on a threatening car. The trainees are supposed to utilize the military training in techniques to recognize the danger in seconds and efficiently respond to it. The vehicle driving techniques are more military based and involves training the new agents on how to changes lanes at high speed, do back up, and learn counter-steering techniques. Survival techniques are also taught to ensure trainees are aware of how to protect themselves. In FBI Academy, students are taught that there are no accidents, but crashes (Cruickshank, 2013).
Carrying firearms has long been prohibited for FBI agents. However, following the Kansas City Massacre of 1934, they are now allowed to carry guns. In this regard, FBI is compelled initiate the firearm-training program. The program aims at developing and delivering a comprehensive and standard training on the proper and safe use of a firearm while on duty (Justice.gov, 2014).
Comparing The FBI Academy And Quasi-Military Training
The FBI training differs from the quasi-military in that it has a program where it trains on law enforcement executive development. This seminar was introduced in 1981 and is meant for the leaders of mid-sized law enforcement agencies. Through it, officers are trained on how to reflect and prepare for the next course of their career. In this context the intelligence and security chiefs are facilitated on matters that affect their jobs; aspects such as leadership, strategic planning, legal issues, media relations, and social issues and policing programs are addressed. In the training environment, the participants are allowed to think on a problem-solving strategy. This allows them to consult each other and come up with new thoughts on tackling these aspects of their career. The participants also have the opportunity to share the successes experienced by their communities in addressing this issues. The interaction is necessary for learning new ideas of leading security agencies.
The quasi-military approach of policing differs from the FBI Academy training in that itr does not concentrate on academic education or motivation of the trainees. The quasi-military training focuses more on physical and military-style approach. In policing history, veterans from the armed forces were often absorbed into the police management. These leaders adopted the military approach to policing in which they compelled the police officers to pledge loyalty to the organization, enforced them to be disciplined. There was also an emphasis on the physical and mental self-reliance and conformity. This differs from FBI training in which it trains on better relations, leadership skills and motivation of the trainees.
According to Weinblatt (2017), both the paramilitary and FBI Academy training is intensive and anxiety provoking. Surviving through the training is a hard endeavor. It is the most difficult part of the security and intelligence career. Weinblatt reports that the instructors usually subject the trainees to pressure. This kind of training is meant to help the trainees withstand stress while working and still maintain high performance. The exposure to pressure also serves to have the trainees endure tough working environments, have improved physical performance, and show unwavering loyalty to the organization. Furthermore, when the new agents are trained under pressure and intimidation, they will show fear for the trained authorities.
Both the FBI academy training and the paramilitary training sessions are extensive and expensive. Collectively there are over 20,000 publicly funded law enforcement agencies in the US. These agencies employ close to one million people. All these personnel undergo training through the available government training capabilities. This makes it expensive and a hard task to undertake the law enforcement and security training. Therefore, the FBI and quasi-military policing training is an expensive endeavor for the government.
The FBI Academy training has been described as a softer approach when compared to the paramilitary training. Despite the fact that it is meant to prepare the recruits both physically and in educational aspects, the FBI training is seen to be much softer while the paramilitary approach is considered hardy. The FBI training aims to train agents who are all rounded such an agent will appreciate the diversity of the society, be highly disciplined and be loyal to the government and the authorities. The FBI training is seen as inadequate, and the trainees are perceived to be incapable of withstanding stress in the streets. Some opponents think the agents from FBI training might not have the capability to depict bravery, but they will show increased levels of physical cowardice (Weinblatt, 2017).
The paramilitary is more traditionalist approach of training police and security personnel. It has been approved in most states and is famous in state police and high way patrol sectors. It is seen as a hard training suitable for spit and polish troopers. The training approach is less academic and more physical. The officers who are trained using this method are well equipped to fight in the streets. They are prone to use their weapons such as guns and another armory in eliminating street chaos. The environment they work on is quite dangerous and chaotic. Here being vulnerable to harm and fatality is high. Therefore, the paramilitary training is not systematic like the FBI Academy training. The chances of surviving street battle are not guaranteed. To be able to utilize the proper precautions in surviving in the streets the new officers should undergo a lot of patrol preparation. On the contrary, the FBI Academy training is more systematic and will give a more technically prepared agent. The FBI training is tactical, and a new graduate will be able to adapt to the environment efficiently and safely.
The FBI and paramilitary training are similar in the fact that both train on being loyal to the authority, they emphasize on discipline and instill a habit of following orders. All the trainees are expected to have a good sense in adhering to the country laws. Both paramilitary and FBI officers work to protect the American laws and Americans as a whole. They should be able to recognize when people are breaking the law and be in a position to respond to such a situation. Both approaches of training, therefore, involve preparing the trainees on what the law requires of them and their roles in protecting it (Weinblatt, 2017).
Unlike the FBI training, the paramilitary training is more aggressive and does not concentrate on backups. It is utilized in most police academies; unfortunately, most of the candidates find it hard to survive through it. Some cadets who have been recruited to the police department are seen to show resentment on the hardy training. The military style approach is perceived by instructors and law enforcement educators as a means to compel candidates in becoming disciplined in their service. Due to its aggressive and coercive nature, the paramilitary training has been criticized as unnecessary. The departments that utilize the military training have been reported to be losing over a quarter of its Academy roster. Additionally, the state funding for this training has been reduced. Cadets are keeping of from such career, and most are quitting within the first few weeks of training because of injuries and physical exhaustion (Borgmeier, Loman, Hara, & Rodriguez 2015).
According to Weinblatt (2017), the trainees from the FBI academy is more philosophical and utilizes the academic training approach; this makes it raise agents who are not well bound for tough duties. There are observations that in some situations such agents may have problems understanding their mission requirements. The students who are trained using the FBI motivational approach may have issues with tardiness. In this regard, they may not be able to withstand harsh weather during the performance of their duties. Weinblatt reports that the student raised in a friendly environment may not be capable of waking up early morning and driving through stormy weather. In such a situation, trainees might be late of duty, and this might inconvenience their employers or the people they are meant to serve.
Both training approaches have challenges with public safety and public service. The FBI is more focused on delivering on public safety. The officers from the FBI training academy are supposed to protect the public and eliminate chances of harm and destruction. The quasi-military approach is less cautious to safety and might result in harming people and destroying properties. There has been increased shooting that is associated with the paramilitary officers. For instance, the highway patrol department has been rife for incidences pertaining threatening lives of motorists in their aim to deliver service. Other complaints include issues with residential parking. Therefore, the paramilitary training raises officers who are service oriented. Their practices sometimes are seen to be life-threatening and therefore not cautious of safety.
The FBI is similar to paramilitary in the sense that the trainees are required to undertake education on criminal law. Additionally, both instruct the trainees on how to conduct investigation more efficiently and swiftly. Both approaches of training pertain facilitating the candidates on how to follow the fundament principles of intelligence and security. However, the paramilitary police training concentrates more on patrol and reporting. The FBI, on the other hand, focuses effort on behavior analysis and leadership skills. The FBI does not involve instructing its agents on traffic control.
Similarly, the FBI and paramilitary training are known to utilize real life experiences to prepare the trainees for fieldwork. The FBI trainees are required to take a tour through the Hogan’s Alley; it is a fierce town with criminal activities such as robbery and violence. The environment is fictional and set to reflect the real life situation upon which the agents will be working. Some of the activities here are life threatening, and sometimes the weak trainees quit because of fear and intimidation. The paramilitary training also has field training though not in a particular location. In the paramilitary, there may be field training entailing crime incidents and real life investigations. Therefore, both the training attempt to prepare candidates of what to expect in real practice.
In conclusion, the FBI and quasi-military have both similarities and differences. Some of the similarities include the fact that both the training utilizes physical fitness, knowledge and critical thinking for candidates to be considered fit for recruitment. There are measures and principles that candidates should adhere to be considered suitable for their mission. Similarly, both the training are meant to bring out candidates who are disciplined and capable of taking orders from their superiors. The major difference is that the paramilitary approach is more aggressive and does not concentrate on leadership and motivation. The FBI approach is considered soft and unfit for street chaos. It is suitable for complicated high crime and terrorist situations.
References
Borgmeier, C., Loman, S. L., Hara, M., & Rodriguez, B. J. (2015). Training school personnel to identify interventions based on functional behavioral assessment. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders , 23 (2), 78-89.
Cruickshank D., M.S. (2013). Perspective: evaluating the paramilitary structure and morale. FBI Law Enforcement bulleting. Retrieved from https://leb.fbi.gov/2013/october- november/perspective-evaluating-the-paramilitary-structure-and-morale
Justice.gov (2014). Organization, mission, and functions manual: federal bureau of investigation. Office of the attorney general. Retrieved from https://www.justice.gov/jmd/organization- mission-and-functions-manual-federal-bureau-investigation
Stubbins Bates, E. (2015). Towards Effective Military Training in International Humanitarian Law. Browser Download This Paper .
Weinblatt R., (2017). The Paramilitary vs. Academic training debate. The national law enforcement community journal. Retrieved from http://policelink.monster.com/training/articles/1996-the-paramilitary-vs-academic- training-debate
